In a late 6 to 3 ruling, just weeks before Election Day, and coming just minutes after the release of very good news in regard to a similar law in Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court has now blocked Wisconsin's Photo ID voting law for this November's election.

A 1-page order [PDF] vacates a 7th Circuit Court of Appeals stay of the U.S. District Court’s permanent injunction that had, until blocked by the Appeals court, prevented Wisconsin from enforcing its Republican-enacted photo ID law.

SCOTUS has now restored the right of some 300,000 duly registered Badger State voters to take part in the November 4, 2014 election. Many of those lawfully registered voters would have lost that right, simply because they lacked a narrow form of a state-approved photo ID.

According to the District Court Judge Lynn Adelman's April ruling after the trial, it was "absolutely clear," based on evidence and expert testimony, that Wisconsin's law would have "prevent[ed] more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes."

Thursday's SCOTUS order is likely to come as a disappointment to WI's Republican Gov. Scott Walker who has regarded the Photo ID law as a top priority in advance of his "toss up" re-election contest against Democratic challenger Mary Burke. Though 300,000 registered voters --- 10% of the electorate in WI --- might have been disenfranchised by the law, but for tonight's ruling by the Supremes, Walker was named the winner of his initial 2010 election by just under 125,000 votes...

As The BRAD BLOG previously observed, in covering the ACLU’s emergency petition to the Supreme Court, and the well-reasoned opinion of the five dissenting judges on the evenly divided 7th Circuit Court of Appeal, this case entailed a watershed moment for both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Would the two Justices adhere to principles they themselves signed onto in a landmark 2008 polling place photo ID case in Indiana (Crawford v. Marion County), or would they abandon principle in favor of a concerted partisan effort to help rig the outcome of an election by way of a law that would, sans any lawful reason and based upon blatant falsehoods put forth by the 7th Circuit Court, disproportionately disenfranchise wide swaths of the electorate from demographic groups which historically lean towards Democratic candidates.

We specifically warned that "an unscrupulous decision by the Court…could well mark a giant step towards converting our supposedly constitutionally-protected, representative democracy into an oligarchy."

While an ultimate decision on the merits of the case will have to await a decision on an anticipated ACLU petition for a writ of certiorari, with Roberts and Kennedy having joined Justices Breyer, Kagan, Ginsberg and Sotomayor, in granting the ACLU’s emergency petition, both Justices did more than simply adhere to principle. They may well have rescued our representative form of democracy, for now, from an oligarchic assault.

The SCOTUS dissenters in the case were Justices Thomas, Scalia and Alito, all Republican appointees to the Court.

The ball, for now, has been passed back to voters themselves in Wisconsin. Citizens who value representative democracy would understandably be angry at their representatives for attempting to strip a a precious right that so many have fought and died for over the years. That right was very nearly lost in this roller coaster of a court battle in response to the now-blocked GOP law. Irrespective of Party, voters, especially in Wisconsin, need to decide whether they will exercise that precious right, and, if so, whether the vote they cast should send a clear message to those who sought to deprive them of that right in the first place.

* * *

Please help support The BRAD BLOG's fiercely independent, award-winning coverage of your electoral system --- now in our ELEVENTH YEAR! --- as available from no other media outlet in the nation...

Earlier stories pointed out it was physically impossible for those without I.D.s required by the law to obtain them due to ridiculous DMV hours in many areas.

Have to cut somewhere to cover the huge tax giveaway to private business owners in Wisconsin, gradually reduced to ZERO % by 2016, possibly even to a negative tax rate depending on business income. 'irresponsible budgeting' by Republicans

Photo ID in Ohio should get the same treatment. Licenses or other state issued documentation is not free. If it costs anything to vote other than transportation, it's effectively a poll tax. Trying to prove one's own existence can be near impossible for the homeless, for instance.

I just laugh at some of the Right Wing posters. okay, cry. Even when you show them where they are mistaken about photo ID's for flying, or check cashing, etc, they still argue with you. It's a losing battle.

Ohio's voter ID requirement is not particularly onerous, as there are a number of acceptable forms of ID above and beyond state-issue Photo ID, as required (until last night) in state's like WI and TX.

According to Google's handy dandy new function (Just search for "STATE Voter ID"):

Acceptable forms of voter ID include - but are not limited to -

An unexpired Ohio driver’s license or state identification card with present or former address so long as the voter’s present residential address is printed in the official list of registered voters for that precinct.
A military identification.
A photo identification that was issued by the United States government or the State of Ohio, that contains the voter’s name and current address and that has an expiration date that has not passed.
An original or copy of a current utility bill with the voter’s name and present address.
An original or copy of a current bank statement with the voter’s name and present address.
An original or copy of a current government check with the voter’s name and present address.

Voters without ID are allowed to vote with a provisional ballot which, presumably, will then be counted if the person is later verified (though I haven't checked on how OH does that process.)

As to homeless voters, you're right, they deserve to vote, but I don't know what they would need to do to identify themselves if they didn't have one of the above.

For the record, OH SoS Jon Husted, back in 2011, before he took his hard turn to the voter suppressing right, actually blocked the state GOP from implementing strict polling place Photo ID restrictions, as we reported (positively!) at the time, when he said [emphasis added]:

“I want to be perfectly clear, when I began working with the General Assembly to improve Ohio’s elections system it was never my intent to reject valid votes. I would rather have no bill than one with a rigid photo identification provision that does little to protect against fraud and excludes legally registered voters' ballots from counting."

Well I feel better about being able to vote. I went last month to get my Wisconsin Driver's License with an updated address thinking that Walkers minions would want my state issued voter ID to have the correct address, though I am registered at my current address. I was told my drivers license would take a couple of weeks after special "security" measures were placed in my new card. It has now been more than 3 weeks and I have not received it in the mail (as I was told it would be delivered to me). I called the DMV and inquired. Their records indicate I should have received it, but I have not (as far as I know). The license was not sent in a DMV envelope, but a plain, generic envelope that could have been mistaken for junk mail. Either that or it has been "lost" because I live in Feingold's old state Senate district which is notoriously Dem. I was trying to get ahead of Walker so I could still vote, but it seems he was not going to let me or other likely lefties vote. Now I can take a sigh of relief and hope they will release my license or allow me to get a replacement. We used to have the ability to obtain the drivers license that day (without "security" measures). Now we are lucky if we can get our licenses in a timely manner if we live in Dem strongholds.